View Full Version : Why all the optimism over Souness?
Bossworld
10-01-2007, 17:24
Maybe i'm too young to know about the Bhatti era etc. or the full extent of the Hayward's involvement, but surely Souness spells trouble for the club? What's his real intentions for getting involved with a club he has no connection to and what's going to happen to McCarthy (who's doing a sound job at the moment) - apparently odds on him being here next season are down to 6-4.
Just wondering why he's seen as almost a messiah? Forget the SJH needs to go/has done this wrong arguement for the moment, what difference is Souness going to make?!
Oh and this talk of a second consortium being interested... i'm living in Newcastle where there seems to be talk of a takeover every week so wouldn't take anything as gosple either way. And I'm fairly sure what the locals think of Mr. Souness and it aint positive.
but surely Souness spells trouble for the club?
Why?
How has he convinced someone who has made a lot of money to back him if he is such a $$$$?
He is in it to get back into football at the top level, and we are a good price and a good oppourtinity to do just that.
I can't understand how anyone can think a new buyer will be a disaster without knowing anything about him.
Souness is a football man who has played and won medals at the highest level and managed in 3 countries and won trophies in all of them. He also wants to be involved. The knowledge he could bring in with the money is going to take some beating
wolfyjoe
10-01-2007, 17:32
Money mate, to the tune of 20 mil! Yess please!
Del Woppio
10-01-2007, 17:35
Money mate, to the tune of 20 mil! Yess please!
All to spent on the cream on the UK's talent, eh?
It's not just whether Souness takes over Bossworld, the fact is this club is going nowhere under the present ownership. Despite the millions put into the club in the past, (for which we are grateful), it is time for a change. SJH is not going to be around for a whole lot longer and since his family are not interested, and might just sell to the first bidder who comes along, then any transfer of the club to another owner should take place as soon as possible. Of course, they should be responsible owners and it is right for Sir Jack to check credentials and make absolutely certain the club would go to the right people but I hope it happens sooner rather than later.
Bossworld
10-01-2007, 17:40
Why?
How has he convinced someone who has made a lot of money to back him if he is such a $$$$?
He is in it to get back into football at the top level, and we are a good price and a good oppourtinity to do just that.
I can't understand how anyone can think a new buyer will be a disaster without knowing anything about him.
Souness is a football man who has played and won medals at the highest level and managed in 3 countries and won trophies in all of them. He also wants to be involved. The knowledge he could bring in with the money is going to take some beating
Ok, maybe another question. Forget Hoddle had ever managed here (using him as an example cos of spells as a big-time manager) , would you have him here with a consortium of people no one knows anything about or their identity, and not question his intentions?
Souness dragged Newcastle into the mess they're in now, he wasn't successful at Southampton either and disrupted the club. Should have thought he's also got a few quid of his own in his pocket so what's he to gain out of this if he doesn't need money? I can't believe it's for footballing reasons mate.
I'm interested in a takeover don't get me wrong, like i see everyone on the thread is, but I just don't like the idea of Souness!
gaz kford
10-01-2007, 17:43
It's not just whether Souness takes over Bossworld, the fact is this club is going nowhere under the present ownership. Despite the millions put into the club in the past, (for which we are grateful), it is time for a change. SJH is not going to be around for a whole lot longer and since his family are not interested, and might just sell to the first bidder who comes along, then any transfer of the club to another owner should take place as soon as possible. Of course, they should be responsible owners and it is right for Sir Jack to check credentials and make absolutely certain the club would go to the right people but I hope it happens sooner rather than later.
Good point Kenny also SJH as said he will give the club away if someone will invest £20m. But when SJH dies whats say the Hayward family want £20m for the club for them selfs, and not to invest back into the club as it at the moment.
wolfyjoe
10-01-2007, 17:47
All to spent on the cream on the UK's talent, eh?
No, Souness' partner is that Kia Joorabchian...It will be the cream of Argentinas talent mate!
gaz kford
10-01-2007, 18:09
No, Souness' partner is that Kia Joorabchian...
Not according to the E&S tonight he isnt.
Deutsch Wolf
10-01-2007, 18:15
Spoilt brats.
EasternWolf
10-01-2007, 18:25
Why?
How has he convinced someone who has made a lot of money to back him if he is such a $$$$?
He is in it to get back into football at the top level, and we are a good price and a good oppourtinity to do just that.
I can't understand how anyone can think a new buyer will be a disaster without knowing anything about him.
Souness is a football man who has played and won medals at the highest level and managed in 3 countries and won trophies in all of them. He also wants to be involved. The knowledge he could bring in with the money is going to take some beating
If you believe that you'll believe anything
whitemouse75
10-01-2007, 18:33
what are his motives then if its not that we are an attractive prospect?
Bossworld
10-01-2007, 19:23
what are his motives then if its not that we are an attractive prospect?
Attractive in what sense? That he gets a football club for free in return for the promise of £20m of investment? I'm not entirely sure how the money is supposed to be quantified, unless it's put in the hands of a third party?
Disregarding the finance, if we don't get promoted, what does he get out of it? If we do get promoted, what are his motives other than to make cash? He's certainly not in it because of his devotion to WWFC! (this isn't a pro SJH rant!) Where's the substence to this offer from a 'knight in shining armour'?
Dr Wolfenstein
10-01-2007, 19:33
Credible former football players are often used as front men for businessmen with less than honorable intentions. Even now who would doubt Dougan's good intentions & love of the club ? And John Richards?
But business is business & whoever signs the cheques has the last say, & football doesn't quite fit into normal business models because of the irrational loyalty of the majority of customers.
Sam Hamman stayed in business but Wimbledon didn't (not in Wimbledon & not as far their local fans were concerned). An alternative Man U exists formed by disgruntled fans. Are Chelsea fans who remember Osgood & their club's history etc happy with being priced out of their club's present & future by an owner who may move on at a whim? Which way will West Ham go?
£20 million is getting Wolves & whole lot of tradition etc on the cheap. £20 million will guarantee very little these days. There must a clearly spelt out longterm plan beyond this initial investment, before this offer can be taken seriously by anyone who loves the club.
Stewarton Wolf
10-01-2007, 19:34
All to spent on the cream on the UK's talent, eh?
As opposed to little or no money being spent on everyones leftovers and dross.
Bumbamuffin
10-01-2007, 19:47
I just don't understand this fear of somebody wanting to come into the club to make it a profitable business for them.If this is to happen then we will be safely established in the Premiership which surely is what everybody wants?
If you compare that to the current safe,non-profitable business with a football team marooned in the CCC(and P/L survival a World away),I know which I'd choose every day of the week.
ask any Newcastle fan about Souness and they wont be very positive. Some of his transfer dealings appear shady to say the least.
Wolves should be very careful in who they sell to--i'm worried with all this knee-jerk reaction amongs a large set of fans, there will be a huge pressure to 'sell'.
Also this buy them cheap and young policy, along with hard work seems to be producing results, i dont see why we should jeapordise this.
Uncle Festa
10-01-2007, 21:09
Ask any Newcastle fan about Keegan. They think he is the messiah. Tells you want you need to know about the knowledgable Geordies
Despite the millions put into the club in the past, (for which we are grateful), it is time for a change. SJH is not going to be around for a whole lot longer and since his family are not interested, and might just sell to the first bidder who comes along
Sorry to pick on you KennyB, but you have hit on something important. As far as I am concerned, the club side which is currently the biggest in the World is Man Utd. Their current owner has rarely left his hospital bed in Florida since he took over the club and his sons (who he installed on the board of the club) are Americans through and through. None of this has stopped Man Utd from being the biggest club side in the world.
That said should people worry that Wolves alleged future owner has an allegedly corrupt newspaper reporter friend and an allegedly dodgy football agent as a backer?
ask any Newcastle fan about Souness and they wont be very positive. Some of his transfer dealings appear shady to say the least.
Wolves should be very careful in who they sell to--i'm worried with all this knee-jerk reaction amongs a large set of fans, there will be a huge pressure to 'sell'.
Also this buy them cheap and young policy, along with hard work seems to be producing results, i dont see why we should jeapordise this.
Totally agree. After the failures of spend spend spend policies in the past I'd want to see new owners investing in coaching, youth and good value for money players. Not multi million pound transfers that don't pass the Lord Stevens smell test.
Boss Hogg
10-01-2007, 21:20
I'm looking forward to seeing Titus Bramble and Boumsong in the old gold. That's why I'm optimistic over Souness :-(
ooh la la
10-01-2007, 21:25
Forget the takeover bid, would any of us have wanted Souness here as a manager after Twoddle left? I for one would not have, so I'm really not looking forward to him taking over the club.
My main worry I.D. is that if SJH should pop off (and I'm not wishing that he does) then what would happen next given that his sons don't seem interested in the club. My guess would be that they would try to make themselves a quid or two by changing the rules that SJH has laid down, i.e. he doesn't want any money for the club and the £20 million should go towards team building. Would his family be so generous? I have my doubts unless SJH left a will stipulating that.
The Weasel
10-01-2007, 21:39
My main worry I.D. is that if SJH should pop off (and I'm not wishing that he does) then what would happen next given that his sons don't seem interested in the club. My guess would be that they would try to make themselves a quid or two by changing the rules that SJH has laid down, i.e. he doesn't want any money for the club and the £20 million should go towards team building. Would his family be so generous? I have my doubts unless SJH left a will stipulating that.
And I'd wager that's a pretty reasonable assumption!
HazelGroveWolf
10-01-2007, 22:11
I can list a whole load of former Wolves players that I would not want anywhere near control of the club. We have suffered two of them in the last 25 years, that said I still hold both in high regard. What does Souness offer that those could not? OK, he could have a plan by virtue of his backers and the right kind of objective thought that doesn't generally come from a lifetime fan.
BTW I think SJH needs to sort things out before he shuffles off this mortal coil. I imagined until the last few years he hadn't really considered it but I think since 2003 he has been in two minds sometimes anticipating the inevitable and at other times grasping control with the vigor he always had. I cannot see Wolves just drifting into another ownership state should the old fart get run over by a bus tomorrow. He will have something in place now but I would guess he would like to oversee a positive transition of ownership. Wolves on the up and him able to observe and take part in any acheivement.
ask any Newcastle fan about Souness and
.............he was there manager, so how is that relevant
.............he was there manager, so how is that relevant
He made footballing decisions, involved in buying players, organising the set up of the club.
He will be doing the same at Wolves if involved, with the mystery backers controlling the financial aspect.
Its very relvant.
Boumsong, Luque, dodgy agents...friends with willie makay.
I wouldn't want to see him selling programmes at the club.
Black Suit
11-01-2007, 00:43
No bugger has made a success of managing that club since 1969. He's won trophies everywhere else.
He made footballing decisions, involved in buying players, organising the set up of the club.
He will be doing the same at Wolves if involved, with the mystery backers controlling the financial aspect.
Absolute rubbish.
If he comes he is not the manager
Visage Wolf
11-01-2007, 09:46
I can't understand how anyone can think a new buyer will be a disaster without knowing anything about him.
I can't understand how anyone can think a new buyer wont be a disaster without knowing anything about him.
As opposed to little or no money being spent on everyones leftovers and dross.
Such as Henry, Kightly and Mcindoe i suppose. Yeah good point lets have some decent money again to go and spend on real star players (And they dont come cheap do they?)
I can't understand how anyone can think a new buyer wont be a disaster without knowing anything about him.
In the last 3 seasons, who has bought a football club in the championship and $$$$ed it up?
People have learned the lesson of Bradford city and Leeds. Those coming into football are far sharper than Risdale at his worse.
Provide evidence for pessimism please.
Visage Wolf
11-01-2007, 10:03
Provide evidence for pessimism please.
Provide evidence for optimism please.
Ask any Newcastle fan about Keegan. They think he is the messiah. Tells you want you need to know about the knowledgable Geordies
I used to go and watch Newcastle play when Ardiles was manager and the stadium was half-empty and the club were looking like they might get relegated to the third division. Keegan comes along and with a three years they almost win the title and a have a waiting list for tickets. I'd call him the messiah.
In the last 3 seasons, who has bought a football club in the championship and $$$$ed it up?
.
In the last 3 seasons who has bought a football club in the championship and spent heavily? Of course, all you are seeing is pound signs and as we know that is a guarentee of success isn't it?
As opposed to little or no money being spent on everyones leftovers and dross.
McIndoe was regarded by Barnsley fans as their best player, Kightly was certainly one of the best players in non-league football and Steven Ward will be the most expensive signing in the history of the Eircom League. I take it you've adopted the mentality that if players don't cost several million they must be rubbish.
The only worry about Souness taking control of Wolves is that his success in the past (as a manager) has been short term, a couple of good seasons and then move on. Has a club gone on to years of sustained success after his departure?
Provide evidence for optimism please.
Those comparable clubs that have changed hands are not now "in disaster".
SJH will be leaving
SJH will be leavingNow answer my question, or are you unable to?
Visage Wolf
11-01-2007, 10:22
Those comparable clubs that have changed hands are not now "in disaster".
Which clubs?
Which clubs?
Coventry and Derby have changed hands in the last 3 years. Both inherited debts. Neither are now "in the conference". Neither are now bankrupt.
Now answer the question.
Albion have also changed ownership.
There are at least £20m reasons to be optimistic. There is no guarantee money available would be spent wisely but the idea that something with £20m in the bank has the same or worse prospects than something with nothing sounds like a dodgy argument to me. Isn't that why SJH wants to do a deal this way?
Visage Wolf
11-01-2007, 10:34
Coventry and Derby have changed hands in the last 3 years. Both inherited debts. Neither are now "in the conference". Neither are now bankrupt.
Now answer the question.
Albion have also changed ownership.
So because Coventry, Derby and WBA have changed hands and havent gone bust, Souness would be a success at Wolves?
What fantastic logic.
So because Coventry, Derby and WBA have changed hands and havent gone bust, Souness would be a success at Wolves?
What fantastic logic.
I haven't said he'll be a success. I have said I see no reason to believe he will be a disaster. Can you please explain why you think he will be and what evidence you are basing that on.
Or you could ignore the question because it is reactionary rubbish with no basis in fact.
Visage Wolf
11-01-2007, 11:07
I haven't said he'll be a success. I have said I see no reason to believe he will be a disaster.
So we should risk handing the club over to him and his shadowy consortium simply because we think he wont be a disaster?
Why risk it when there's no reason to beleive that there will be an upturn in fortunes?
I can't understand how anyone can think a new buyer wont be a disaster without knowing anything about him.
So we should risk handing the club over to him and his shadowy consortium simply because we think he wont be a disaster?
Why risk it when there's no reason to beleive that there will be an upturn in fortunes?
So which is it. You see no reason he won't be a disaster, or you see no reason to believe there won't be an upturn in fortunes.
Make your mind up.
Decide on a viewpoint.
Then back it up please.
Or is that too hard for you?
If it is, stick to the off topic forum
Visage Wolf
11-01-2007, 11:15
So which is it. You see no reason he won't be a disaster, or you see no reason to believe there won't be an upturn in fortunes.
Make your mind up.
Decide on a viewpoint.
Then back it up please.
Or is that too hard for you?
If it is, stick to the off topic forum
My point is that its impossible to say either way, on the basis of information in the public eye, so why risk the future of the club when we're doing just fine as we are?
My point is that its impossible to say either way, on the basis of information in the public eye, so why risk the future of the club when we're doing just fine as we are?
Your opinion is that you don't have one.(in which case why post the following)
I can't understand how anyone can think a new buyer wont be a disaster without knowing anything about him.
If you haven't noticed SJH isn't staying.(Thank God)
Get over it.
If you have no opinion on the prospective new owners, why clutter up threads on them?
Visage Wolf
11-01-2007, 11:21
Do *YOU* think the new owner will be a success, and why?
Do *YOU* think the new owner will be a success, and why?
If you ever bother to answer my question I will respond to yours.
About time you actually had an opinion instead of sniping at everyone elses with smart arsed comments.
Visage Wolf
11-01-2007, 11:44
If you ever bother to answer my question I will respond to yours.
About time you actually had an opinion instead of sniping at everyone elses with smart arsed comments.
Can I take it from that that you have no reason to think that Souness will be a success?
Can I take it from that that you have no reason to think that Souness will be a success?
Can I take it from that you refuse to answer my question and form your own opinion.
Get together with Wivey Wolf and maybe you could form an opinion between you.
Visage Wolf
11-01-2007, 11:54
Can I take it from that you refuse to answer my question and form your own opinion.
Get together with Wivey Wolf and maybe you could form an opinion between you.
If you dont want to answer the question, simply say so.
I promise I wont infer that you are unable to.
Coventry and Derby have changed hands in the last 3 years. Both inherited debts. Neither are now "in the conference". Neither are now bankrupt.
Now answer the question.
FFS John, Derby? Police are still investigating potential criminal activity relating to the sale of Derby in October 2003. After they were taken over they sold all their best players, finished 20th in the Championship, their manager walked out, and fans staged numerous protests in order to finally get rid of the new board. Derby, and Pickering giving the club away to a new board in October 2003, are exactly the kind of example that should make us wary of Souness.
Visage Wolf
11-01-2007, 12:10
It seems that the only positive thing that's persuading people that Souness would be a good owner is that he's not SJH.
We dont know who's in the consortium
We dont know what strings are attached to the 20m
We dont know what Souness's plans are in the short, medium and long term
We dont know what plans he has regarding our 'young and hungry players'
We dont know whether he'll alllow MM to carry on with his (so far succesful) plans.
And yet people are falling over themselves to suggest that SJH and Moxey should just hand over the keyes and go 'Here you go, do what you want' before walking off into the sunset....
Hibbitt was King
11-01-2007, 12:11
Points we should all be asking IMO are:
Do we wish to give the club a chance to get into the upper reaches of the PL? I'd say yes.
Is that likely to happen with SJH still in charge? I'd say no based on his view that the club needs investment and he's not going to provide it. Also he's had 15 years at this and our league position is much the same as when he took over.
Is it therefore good to get a new owner? Yes.
Who is the right man? Well we seem to have a current owner who is going to make as sure as he can that the right man gets control. Remember Molineux cannot be redeveloped because the council own the land, precisely to warn off those looking to make a quick buck.
Is there a category of new owner best suited? I'd say no. We had a former player in Dougan take over before, and look what happened. John Richards was a poor MD. So anyone who puts up SJH asking price and meets his protective covenants will do. Even Souness IMO.
So we have to trust Sir Jack to sell to the best man of the (3?) offers. I can't see any valid reason to argue that we're better off if no sale goes through.
Visage Wolf
11-01-2007, 12:16
Points we should all be asking IMO are:
Do we wish to give the club a chance to get into the upper reaches of the PL? I'd say yes.
Is that likely to happen with SJH still in charge? I'd say no based on his view that the club needs investment and he's not going to provide it. Also he's had 15 years at this and our league position is much the same as when he took over.
Is it therefore good to get a new owner? Yes.
You could have made exactly the same arguments before the Bhatti's came in. A stagnating club, new owners promising investment - what could possibly go wrong?
If you dont want to answer the question, simply say so.
I promise I wont infer that you are unable to.
Quite happy to.
Once you answer mine.
It seems that the only positive thing that's persuading people that Souness would be a good owner is that he's not SJH.
We dont know who's in the consortium
We dont know what strings are attached to the 20m
We dont know what Souness's plans are in the short, medium and long term
We dont know what plans he has regarding our 'young and hungry players'
We dont know whether he'll alllow MM to carry on with his (so far succesful) plans.
And yet people are falling over themselves to suggest that SJH and Moxey should just hand over the keyes and go 'Here you go, do what you want' before walking off into the sunset....
The same will apply to any new owners.
Yet SJH IS leaving.
So we will have new owners.
Get over it.
Rhoswolf
11-01-2007, 12:32
In general, those posters expressing the most concerns about GS are those that also express the greatest faith in SJH.
Surely, therefore, if SJH accepts the offer then those concerns will be allayed, won't they?
Sport_billy
11-01-2007, 12:57
The thing that worries me most with the Souness bid is the fact that i can see him not being content with the boardroom.
I believe he will end up managing us. I can't imagine Souness will be content with MM picking players and choosing transfer targets.
Now is there any Wolves fan out there who would think this is a good idea?
You could have made exactly the same arguments before the Bhatti's came in. A stagnating club, new owners promising investment - what could possibly go wrong?
You could but was the chairman who sold to the Bhattis particularly interested in finding out what intentions they had?
harriswolf
11-01-2007, 13:09
... i'm living in Newcastle where there seems to be talk of a takeover every week so wouldn't take anything as gosple either way. And I'm fairly sure what the locals think of Mr. Souness and it aint positive.
He had problems there for sure but the fans are biased against him due to his Middlesborough connections.
PREM.L.L
11-01-2007, 13:19
Points we should all be asking IMO are:
Do we wish to give the club a chance to get into the upper reaches of the PL? I'd say yes.
Is that likely to happen with SJH still in charge? I'd say no based on his view that the club needs investment and he's not going to provide it. Also he's had 15 years at this and our league position is much the same as when he took over.
Is it therefore good to get a new owner? Yes.
I see what you're saying, but if things carry on as we are and we get the right players in and (whoosh) get to the Prem this season or next we'd have 30 odd million guarenteed so we wouldn't really need a cash injection as such.
The "safer" bet would of course have that guaranteed cash now but if it didn't come, the way we are at the moment is no bad thing.
I disagree we are stagnating. We've had an overhaul on the playing side and after only a few months we are already seeing positives to it.
The RIGHT people running the club is more important than a 20 m investment as things stand imo.
if we can have both that'd be spiffing.
Hibbitt was King
11-01-2007, 13:25
You could have made exactly the same arguments before the Bhatti's came in. A stagnating club, new owners promising investment - what could possibly go wrong?
You've cut out my point about the ground. The Bhattis were able to buy the land.
Getting out of bed in a morning carries risks, but all (no most) of us do it. It's a question of ambition, which IMO is preferable to the long term risks that stagnation carries.
Hibbitt was King
11-01-2007, 13:32
I see what you're saying, but if things carry on as we are and we get the right players in and (whoosh) get to the Prem this season or next we'd have 30 odd million guarenteed so we wouldn't really need a cash injection as such.
The "safer" bet would of course have that guaranteed cash now but if it didn't come, the way we are at the moment is no bad thing.
I disagree we are stagnating. We've had an overhaul on the playing side and after only a few months we are already seeing positives to it.
The RIGHT people running the club is more important than a 20 m investment as things stand imo.
if we can have both that'd be spiffing.
IMO, it is possible unwittingly to overlook long term stagnation, when finally a manager and board are pulling together after years of strife.
I see what you're saying, but if things carry on as we are and we get the right players in and (whoosh) get to the Prem this season or next we'd have 30 odd million guarenteed so we wouldn't really need a cash injection as such.
The "safer" bet would of course have that guaranteed cash now but if it didn't come, the way we are at the moment is no bad thing.
I disagree we are stagnating. We've had an overhaul on the playing side and after only a few months we are already seeing positives to it.
The RIGHT people running the club is more important than a 20 m investment as things stand imo.
if we can have both that'd be spiffing.
Sorry, but SJH IS leaving.
Come to terms with it and stop hoping things will stay as they are, that isn't on the cards.
PREM.L.L
11-01-2007, 13:53
I know SJH is looking to leave thanks. Why else would he offer the club out?
I'm just saying that a 20m cash injection is not pivotal to our premiership aspirations.
I also don't believe things are as bleak as some think.
We were looking forward to a relegation battle at the start of the season if you remember...........................
Wivey Wolf
11-01-2007, 13:56
In general, those posters expressing the most concerns about GS are those that also express the greatest faith in SJH.
Surely, therefore, if SJH accepts the offer then those concerns will be allayed, won't they?
If Souness convinces the Board and Sir Jack that their bid is serious and they have the best interests of the club at heart, then they deserve the full backing of everyone. Similarly, if he can't, and the Board/SJH decide to go with a different offer - or decide that none of the offers are suitable - then they deserve equal backing.
As of last night, the Souness consortium hadn't seen the books etc - they weren't even in negotiations (despite what the Mirror said). Now they are, they have access to the books and may even decide to withdraw their bid. Who knows?
So at the moment, as I've said on another thread, I'm sitting on the fence - because I (and nobody else on here) has enough factual information to make an informed decision as to whether the Souness bid - or any of the others (if they exist) - is good for the club.
I'm just saying that a 20m cash injection is not pivotal to our premiership aspirations.
So you think Jack has got it wrong for asking for that then?
Get together with Wivey Wolf and maybe you could form an opinion between you.
:D
If Souness convinces the Board and Sir Jack that their bid is serious and they have the best interests of the club at heart, then they deserve the full backing of everyone. Similarly, if he can't, and the Board/SJH decide to go with a different offer - or decide that none of the offers are suitable - then they deserve equal backing.
So whatever happens, the old and new board should be backed?
They can sell it to anyone then and you'll be happy, and back who comes in?
Visage Wolf
11-01-2007, 14:06
If Souness convinces the Board and Sir Jack that their bid is serious and they have the best interests of the club at heart, then they deserve the full backing of everyone. Similarly, if he can't, and the Board/SJH decide to go with a different offer - or decide that none of the offers are suitable - then they deserve equal backing.
As of last night, the Souness consortium hadn't seen the books etc - they weren't even in negotiations (despite what the Mirror said). Now they are, they have access to the books and may even decide to withdraw their bid. Who knows?
So at the moment, as I've said on another thread, I'm sitting on the fence - because I (and nobody else on here) has enough factual information to make an informed decision as to whether the Souness bid - or any of the others (if they exist) - is good for the club.
Agreed.
PREM.L.L
11-01-2007, 14:07
So you think Jack has got it wrong for asking for that then?
No that seems a fair enough sum. It's a nice chunk and would show that potential buyers mean business.
You seem to be just seeing pound signs flashing in your head though mate. I'm saying that's not the b-all and end-all of it and currently were proving it.
Couple of decent signings and we may be going up anyway.
Wivey Wolf
11-01-2007, 14:12
So whatever happens, the old and new board should be backed?
They can sell it to anyone then and you'll be happy, and back who comes in?
Try reading what I've written, I'm sure you'll work it out eventually (it isn't rocket science...)
Agreed.
Both the clowns are in agreement then.
Good.
They both agree they have no opinion to give.
Good.
Any chance of shutting up while everyone else gives thiers then
Try reading what I've written, I'm sure you'll work it out eventually (it isn't rocket science...)
You have said you will back whatever decision Jack makes and back the new owners.
Del Woppio
11-01-2007, 14:14
Try reading what I've written, I'm sure you'll work it out eventually (it isn't rocket science...)
I think you'll find the phrase is 'rocket surgery'. You could use 'brain science' as an alternative.
Wivey Wolf
11-01-2007, 14:16
You have said you will back whatever decision Jack makes and back the new owners.
And....?
Wivey Wolf
11-01-2007, 14:16
I think you'll find the phrase is 'rocket surgery'. You could use 'brain science' as an alternative.
No wonder John's confused... Actually, I think he'd be confused even if I'd said that...
And....?
So if he sold it to foriegn investors, you'd be ok with that?
Any chance of shutting up while everyone else gives thiers then
That'd be a no then.
Usual clown tactics.
Have no opinion. Slag off everyone else's.
Try having an opinion.
It's not a crime.
Del Woppio
11-01-2007, 14:19
Both the clowns are in agreement then.
Good.
They both agree they have no opinion to give.
Good.
Any chance of shutting up while everyone else gives thiers then
John, the point is that until more information is in the public domain it is impossible to formulate an informed opinion as to whether this potential takeover is a good or a bad thing. This is something you seem reluctant to agree with. I understand you are excited, the prospect of an abitious ownership is exciting to any Wolves fan - but people who are erring on the side of caution, i.e. waiting for the facts before getting excited are, in my opinion, taking the more sensible stance.
Visage Wolf
11-01-2007, 14:24
John, the point is that until more information is in the public domain it isimpossible to formulate an informed opinion as to whether this potential takeover is a good or a bad thing. This is something you seem reluctant to agree with. I understand you are excited, the prospect of an abitious ownership is exciting to any Wolves fan - but people who are erring on the side of caution, i.e. waiting for the facts before getting excited are, in my opinion, taking the more sensible stance.
Nah - easier to be a sheep and declare Souness to be the new messiah, surely?
Wivey Wolf
11-01-2007, 14:25
Post 79. John tells himself off. Quality...
John, the point is that until more information is in the public domain it isimpossible to formulate an informed opinion as to whether this potential takeover is a good or a bad thing.
Unless you are incredibly well placed, it is impossible to form an opinion on anything to do with Wolves, they keep the majority away from the public eye.
If you don't like idle speculation and chat amongst football supporters, can I suggest you avoid football message boards and the pub pre-match.
For the record, I'm not excited by Souness possibly arriving, but by the thought of SJH leaving.
John, the point is that until more information is in the public domain it is impossible to formulate an informed opinion as to whether this potential takeover is a good or a bad thing.
Not really. My position is based on the fact that
(a) Souness has no experience
(b) He is a ****
I don't need to know the details of his proposal to know that I don't want him anywhere near my club, and I'm pretty informed that my two points are fact.
Post 79. John tells himself off. Quality...
Still, the spineless twin refuses to
Have an opinion
$$$$ off and leave others to have one.New owner or not, some things will always stay the same.
Wivey Wolf
11-01-2007, 14:30
Unless you are incredibly well placed, it is impossible to form an opinion on anything to do with Wolves, they keep the majority away from the public eye.
You missed out the word informed ahead of "opinion". :rolleyes:
Del Woppio
11-01-2007, 14:30
Unless you are incredibly well placed, it is impossible to form an opinion on anything to do with Wolves, they keep the majority away from the public eye.
If you don't like idle speculation and chat amongst football supporters, can I suggest you avoid football message boards and the pub pre-match.
For the record, I'm not excited by Souness possibly arriving, but by the thought of SJH leaving.
There's a difference between idle speculation, and denouncing those who implore people to 'wait and see' as clowns.
Are you excited about Jack leaving irrespective of who the new owners are?Because that is the impression you give.
Visage Wolf
11-01-2007, 14:30
John....you seem very angry. Why not step away from the keyboard, go and have a walk, or a tug.
You'll end up having a coronary otherwise....
Not really. My position is based on the fact that
(a) Souness has no experience
(b) He is a ****
I don't need to know the details of his proposal to know that I don't want him anywhere near my club, and I'm pretty informed that my two points are fact.
Do you really think you will get a new owner who has "experience"
Do you not realise that we had an owner who was "lovely", and he's been useless. Perhaps it's about time we had a $$$$
Wivey Wolf
11-01-2007, 14:32
Still, the spineless twin refuses to
Have an opinion
$$$$ off and leave others to have one.New owner or not, some things will always stay the same.
Oh dear. I've upset John again...
Read my posts, it's not brain science...
Are you excited about Jack leaving irrespective of who the new owners are?Because that is the impression you give.
Yes.
I did think I'd made that quite clear.
I'll take anyone as a replacement, and critisise the new owners if they do something I don't agree with.
You don't need to offer blind loyalty to those in charge of the club you support. In fact it's a bit odd to do that.
Del Woppio
11-01-2007, 14:35
Not really. My position is based on the fact that
(a) Souness has no experience
(b) He is a ****
I don't need to know the details of his proposal to know that I don't want him anywhere near my club, and I'm pretty informed that my two points are fact.
Just to play devils advocate.
You don't need experience to be good at something.
It's unclear at this stage whether Sounness or his 'businessman backer' would be the chairman. A businessman in the chair and a football man amonkst* the board members may not be a bad thing.
Being $$$$ is not really indicative as to whether one can be a success in any field, or not.
That said, your two points are fact.
it's not brain science...
It's not illegal to have an opinion
Del Woppio
11-01-2007, 14:36
Yes.
I did think I'd made that quite clear.
I'll take anyone as a replacement, and critisise the new owners if they do something I don't agree with.
You don't need to offer blind loyalty to those in charge of the club you support. In fact it's a bit odd to do that.
Peter Ridsdale?
Sam Hamman?
Nik Leeson?
Jez Moxey?
PREM.L.L
11-01-2007, 14:38
Yes.
I did think I'd made that quite clear.
I'll take anyone as a replacement, and critisise the new owners if they do something I don't agree with.
You don't need to offer blind loyalty to those in charge of the club you support. In fact it's a bit odd to do that.
That's fair enough.
Though you can understand how some think that's idiotic?
Peter Ridsdale?
Sam Hamman?
Nik Leeson?
Jez Moxey?
Yes.
Souness being a c$%t is not a fact it is an opinion. Dale Winton thinks Souness is a lovely bloke, and he's not the kind of Fella who likes to get too close to c$%ts
That's fair enough.
Though you can understand how some think that's idiotic?
The sort of people bought up to respect thier elders and who put saftey first, yes I can understand they'd be scared of change.
Just to play devils advocate.
You don't need experience to be good at something.
No, but when I've interviewed people at work I've never found myself saying "Well, according to your CV, you've got absolutely no experience to do this job, and you also come across as a completely obnoxious ****, but what the Hell, you might be good - the job's yours".
Del Woppio
11-01-2007, 14:42
Yes.
The man who has ruined Leeds United, one of the most crooked businessmen in football, the man responsible for the collapse of barings bank and man about whom you have never had a positive comment to make in a consortium, and you would prefer them to Sir Jack waiting for a buyer he is comfortable selling the club to?
Wivey Wolf
11-01-2007, 14:42
It's not illegal to have an opinion
I know, that's why I welcome reading everyone's - even yours. However, if the facts show that said opinion is based on an incorrect basis, it is stupid not to revise that opinion.
I would also point out that it's stupid to ignore other people's opinions and claim that they haven't given them...
PREM.L.L
11-01-2007, 14:43
The sort of people bought up to respect thier elders and who put saftey first, yes I can understand they'd be scared of change.
So you don't think we should put the safety of the club first?
Deutsch Wolf
11-01-2007, 14:44
Having an idiotic opinion is worse than not having one. Fact.
So you don't think we should put the safety of the club first?
We don't have a crystal ball.
We have no idea how a new owners tenure will go, we just don't.
We do know Jack is off.
Therefore we do know we will get a new owner, and we will never know if he /she will be good for the future of Wolves.
We will have to gamble.
Some people will need to accept it.
The man who has ruined Leeds United, one of the most crooked businessmen in football, the man responsible for the collapse of barings bank and man about whom you have never had a positive comment to make in a consortium, and you would prefer them to Sir Jack waiting for a buyer he is comfortable selling the club to?
They might be better than who SJH widow sells it to if his boat sinks next week.
The future is unpredictable.
Hoping for a dream buyer is a pipe dream.
If they exsisted they would have appeared in the last 3 years.
Flitwick Wolf
11-01-2007, 14:53
Yes.
I did think I'd made that quite clear.
I'll take anyone as a replacement, and critisise the new owners if they do something I don't agree with.
You don't need to offer blind loyalty to those in charge of the club you support. In fact it's a bit odd to do that.
John - a lot of your arguments hold water but this is mad.
Your quite happy for any tom dick or harry to come in just to get SJH out? If a new owner came in and was only interested in stripping the club, your critisism wouldn't make much difference mate.
There are far to many examples of where this happended, and many in the last 5 years or so. It's a very bad idea to say the least.
I'm extremely apprehensive about it. All in all, I'd rather this all just went away until the end of the season. We're doing well now, we have a young, talented squad and everything is stable. Do we really need Souness?
IMO, a lot depends on whether we continue with the "youth first" policy should he take over.
If Souness comes in and we bring in players like Kennedy, Seol, Cort, Silas, Frankowski et al I will be gutted, because it'll mean we've learned nothing in over 10-years. If he comes in and gives us £5m and we spend it on the likes of Sharp, McLeod and Jarvis then I will be pleased. Alas, I fear it'd be the former. We've tried buying promotion before and look where it got us.
Del Woppio
11-01-2007, 14:54
John, you've beat me. My only weapon is logic, and you're proving to be immune to it.
PREM.L.L
11-01-2007, 14:56
We don't have a crystal ball.
We have no idea how a new owners tenure will go, we just don't.
We do know Jack is off.
Therefore we do know we will get a new owner, and we will never know if he /she will be good for the future of Wolves.
We will have to gamble.
Some people will need to accept it.
In the end we'll have no option but to accept it.
We have 2 offers on the table and potentially a 3rd surely it is best to decide between all these rather than snap souness' arm off at the elbow?
SJH has made mistakes with us but he hasn't made many when it comes to business. He loves this club, lets go with his decision.
If he picks souness, great. I've always quite liked him. and if he's got a good Plan, terrific.
But until the deals been made lets hang fire. It's not buying a burger is it!
John - a lot of your arguments hold water but this is mad.
Your quite happy for any tom dick or harry to come in just to get SJH out? If a new owner came in and was only interested in stripping the club, your critisism wouldn't make much difference mate.
There are far to many examples of where this happended, and many in the last 5 years or so. It's a very bad idea to say the least.
If anyone will hand over £20m to get this club, I don't see how they could make thier money back. We are losing money and don't have £20M worth of talent to sell.
I fail to see how anyone will take us over and not try to get us up.
Explain how they could do it and perhaps I wouldn't be in such a rush to see the back of SJH
Alas, I fear it'd be the former. .
Based on what?
Del Woppio
11-01-2007, 15:06
Based on what?
Since when have opinions had to have been based on anything?
In the end we'll have no option but to accept it.
We have 2 offers on the table and potentially a 3rd surely it is best to decide between all these rather than snap souness' arm off at the elbow?
SJH has made mistakes with us but he hasn't made many when it comes to business. He loves this club, lets go with his decision.
If he picks souness, great. I've always quite liked him. and if he's got a good Plan, terrific.
But until the deals been made lets hang fire. It's not buying a burger is it!
SJH has made very few good decisions with regard to Wolves.
I think the idea of a bid involving a football man is a good one, I don't think GS is definately the best offer on the table, but I'd rather his consortium than just some suits with money.
Based on the assumption that Souness is going to want the quickest return on his investment, and that is unlikely to come from investing in players that need time and experience to mature.
Plus it's Wolves, so it's bound to happen.
Based on the assumption that Souness is going to want the quickest return on his investment, and that is unlikely to come from investing in players that need time and experience to mature.
Plus it's Wolves, so it's bound to happen.
If he wants a quick return on his money, then I'd guess he'd know a Kightly over a Kennedy is more likely to fire us up.
Flitwick Wolf
11-01-2007, 15:20
If anyone will hand over £20m to get this club, I don't see how they could make thier money back. We are losing money and don't have £20M worth of talent to sell.
I fail to see how anyone will take us over and not try to get us up.
Explain how they could do it and perhaps I wouldn't be in such a rush to see the back of SJH
£20m being paid for the club is vastly different than putting £20m into a club that you own. In effect you atre merely moving the value of your well being from one asset into another.
It will be just as easy to remove that £20m if you are the owner.
I'm sure this is what SJH is wanting assurances of.
Well if we'd had his money 3 months ago would we even have given Kightly a second glance?
Flitwick Wolf
11-01-2007, 15:25
I think the idea of a bid involving a football man is a good one, I don't think GS is definately the best offer on the table, but I'd rather his consortium than just some suits with money.
I just can't get hy head around your thinking here. We know nothing on the details of any of the potential take-overs but you are willing to risk the future of Wolverhampton Wanderers FC on it, and more so on a guy because you have heard of him.
It's all a bit strange!!
I just can't get hy head around your thinking here. We know nothing on the details of any of the potential take-overs but you are willing to risk the future of Wolverhampton Wanderers FC on it, and more so on a guy because you have heard of him.
It's all a bit strange!!
The future of Wolverhampton Wanderers is at risk from any future buyer. That is fact.
Jack can only get so much in the way of assurances,as the new owner will want flexibility to run it his/her way.
Three suits with no football background, would be a bigger risk than a consortium involving people with vast experience of football.
The fact remains that the new owner will be a risk. There are no safe options.
Visage Wolf
11-01-2007, 15:33
Well if we'd had his money 3 months ago would we even have given Kightly a second glance?
Nope.
'We've got 20m quid in the bank so why am we buying players from the conference? **** 'im off and buy <insert over-paid premiership reject here>'
glasgowwolf
11-01-2007, 15:37
You could but was the chairman who sold to the Bhattis particularly interested in finding out what intentions they had?
No chairman sold the club to the Bhattis.
The receiver sold out to the Bhattis and all he was interested in doing was getting the best price available
Flitwick Wolf
11-01-2007, 15:40
The future of Wolverhampton Wanderers is at risk from any future buyer. That is fact.
Agreed. It is down to the board to ensure that risk is as low as possible.
Jack can only get so much in the way of assurances,as the new owner will want flexibility to run it his/her way.
Agreed again.
Three suits with no football background, would be a bigger risk than a consortium involving people with vast experience of football.
And this is where I struggle. Until we know the details I cannot comprehend how you can argue this point. You are solely basing your thoughts on the basis that GS played football. That means jack$$$$ when you are running a business. It will have a pros, no doubt, but to solely use this is wrong, and that is, at the moment, what you are basing your argument on.
The fact remains that the new owner will be a risk. There are no safe options.
Agreed. It is down to the board to ensure that risk is as low as possible.
Can people stop saying Fact following the end of a sentence, it makes you look like a complete tool. Fact.
....oops
Nope.
'We've got 20m quid in the bank so why am we buying players from the conference? **** 'im off and buy <insert over-paid premiership reject here>'
My sentiments entirely.
And this is where I struggle. Until we know the details I cannot comprehend how you can argue this point. You are solely basing your thoughts on the basis that GS played football. That means jack$$$$ when you are running a business. It will have a pros, no doubt, but to solely use this is wrong, and that is, at the moment, what you are basing your argument on.
GS has played top flight football.
Played international football.
Managed Liverpool, Rangers, Galatasry, Benfica, Southampton, Blackburn and Newcastle.
I doubt any other bidders will have that wealth of experiance and football knowledge within the bid.
Maybe other bids may have come in from ex owners of other clubs, perhaps better deals.
I'm just saying that GS makes the bidders look an attractive proposal when compared to say 3 local moneymen.
I also think the board should only turn down GS if they have a better deal "on the table", not in the hope a better deal turns up one day.
He also spent £35m on Owen, Luque and Boumsong. Shrewd footballing brain or recipe for financial disaster? Hmm.
jonnysuggs
11-01-2007, 16:03
I don't think GS is definately the best offer on the table, but I'd rather his consortium than just some suits with money.
I didn't know there were any other offers on the table
Del Woppio
11-01-2007, 16:04
Who and where he has managed offer no insight as to whether he will be a decent chairman. I'll say the same about his rather dubious recent transfer record.
Flitwick Wolf
11-01-2007, 16:13
GS has played top flight football.
Played international football.
Managed Liverpool, Rangers, Galatasry, Benfica, Southampton, Blackburn and Newcastle.
I doubt any other bidders will have that wealth of experiance and football knowledge within the bid.
Maybe other bids may have come in from ex owners of other clubs, perhaps better deals.
I'm just saying that GS makes the bidders look an attractive proposal when compared to say 3 local moneymen.
I also think the board should only turn down GS if they have a better deal "on the table", not in the hope a better deal turns up one day.
It is possible for 3 local moneymen to hire somone who knows about the ins and outs of the financial side of football, a Kenyon for example.
Very few Chairmen know much about playing football at a professional level. Can anyone name 5 top sides whose chairmen played football at a high level? It's just not essential.
There are far too many unknown details to either say SJH go or SJH please stay. Personally, if GS does take over then I will be more then happy to think that SJH and the board have made a correct decision and I'll be delighted.
If the talks collapse, I will not be asking for SJH's head as I will have full belief that it was for the better of Wolves.
Personally, if GS does take over then I will be more then happy to think that SJH and the board have made a correct decision and I'll be delighted.
If the talks collapse, I will not be asking for SJH's head as I will have full belief that it was for the better of Wolves.
I'm not saying GS is the one, but I am curious that given that SJH has monumentaly messed up his tenure of WWFC, why you believe the decision he makes on the next owner will be the right one?
Who and where he has managed offer no insight as to whether he will be a decent chairman. I'll say the same about his rather dubious recent transfer record.
Who and where someone has played makes no guarentee they will make it as a manager, but I do think they are less of a risk than employing a PE teacher.
I'd rather Souness than Rugger Rick
Visage Wolf
11-01-2007, 16:31
Who and where someone has played makes no guarentee they will make it as a manager, but I do think they are less of a risk than employing a PE teacher.
I'd rather Souness than Rugger Rick
What is it that would make Sounness a good chairman, in your view?
What is it that would make Sounness a good chairman, in your view?
Where did I say a good chairman.
Better than Rugger Rick without a doubt.
Visage Wolf
11-01-2007, 16:36
Where did I say a good chairman.
Better than Rugger Rick without a doubt.
Is that the height of our ambition? Dont you think the club should aspire to something more than 'We want a chairman thats better than Rick'
Flitwick Wolf
11-01-2007, 16:39
I'm not saying GS is the one
Yes you are. You have stated you'll take a bid from anyone who makes an offer to just get SJH out?
but I am curious that given that SJH has monumentaly messed up his tenure of WWFC, why you believe the decision he makes on the next owner will be the right one?
Because of the time and money he invested into the club, he won't give it to just the first person who claims to have £20m, whether he messed up his tenure or not.
Is that the height of our ambition? Dont you think the club should aspire to something more than 'We want a chairman thats better than Rick'
A mid table ccc club, with an unspectacular ground in a $$$$hole midlands town.
Beggars can't be choosers
Del Woppio
11-01-2007, 16:40
Is that the height of our ambition? Dont you think the club should aspire to something more than 'We want a chairman thats better than Rick'
Are you STUPID? He wants ANYBODY who's not a knight, and with a name rhyming with Hack Jaywood. ANYBODY.
Because of the time and money he invested into the club, he won't give it to just the first person who claims to have £20m, whether he messed up his tenure or not.
But GS isn't the first, we know he spoke to the West ham bidders. What makes you believe he will make the right choice?
Flitwick Wolf
11-01-2007, 16:57
But GS isn't the first, we know he spoke to the West ham bidders. What makes you believe he will make the right choice?
For all his faults he loves Wolves. He will not see the club be handed over to some guy who's only idea is to make a fortune. That is why I believe he will make the right decision.
If he didn't care, he'd pocket millions in the take-over like all other chairmen do in these kind of things.
The the only reason the Icelandic guy is at West Ham is to make a fortune when they sell the ground and move. Do you want somone like that?
Hibbitt was King
11-01-2007, 16:59
A mid table ccc club, with an unspectacular ground in a $$$$hole midlands town.
Beggars can't be choosers
I have been sympathetic (no more) to the points you have been trying to make, but I draw the line at self-flagellation.
The ground doesn't need much doing to it which wouldn't bring it back to the state of the art complex it was when first built.
Wolvo is a city and should have been many years ago, and most towns and cities in this country are $$$$holes after decades of socialist influence.
We may joke about wimabigclub and doubt whether we truly are, but with the right finance, leadership at board level, and, of course, manager, we have the fan base to be one of the top dozen clubs in the country, and reverse the apathy caused by relegation from the PL and two years of Hoddle.
For all his faults he loves Wolves. He will not see the club be handed over to some guy who's only idea is to make a fortune. That is why I believe he will make the right decision.
If he didn't care, he'd pocket millions in the take-over like all other chairmen do in these kind of things.
The the only reason the Icelandic guy is at West Ham is to make a fortune when they sell the ground and move. Do you want somone like that?
So SJH will sell the club to someone he thinks is best for Wolves. Given that everything SJH has done has been in the best interests of Wolves, and most of it has been wrong, I find this very worrying.
We won't get a venture capitalist type invester imo as we have little of value for them to sell.
I have been sympathetic (no more) to the points you have been trying to make, but I draw the line at self-flagellation.
I love the town (It's no city). I live and work in it. I do however recognise it has little to offer to attract out of town investors. We were on the market for 3 years with little in the way of interest, we aren't a big draw.
Essex Wolf
11-01-2007, 17:12
It's not just whether Souness takes over Bossworld, the fact is this club is going nowhere under the present ownership. Despite the millions put into the club in the past, (for which we are grateful), it is time for a change. SJH is not going to be around for a whole lot longer and since his family are not interested, and might just sell to the first bidder who comes along, then any transfer of the club to another owner should take place as soon as possible. Of course, they should be responsible owners and it is right for Sir Jack to check credentials and make absolutely certain the club would go to the right people but I hope it happens sooner rather than later.
Spot on post IMV.
Hibbitt was King
11-01-2007, 17:17
I love the town (It's no city). I live and work in it. I do however recognise it has little to offer to attract out of town investors. We were on the market for 3 years with little in the way of interest, we aren't a big draw.
Free of the amateurs who have been running the football club, with potential crowds of 30,000 plus in the PL, I disagree.
It would appear that the original price tag was the stumbling block.
The new owner doesn't have to live in central Wolvo, after all.
Flitwick Wolf
11-01-2007, 17:20
So SJH will sell the club to someone he thinks is best for Wolves.
No, he ain't selling the club. He's giving it to whom he thinks will be the best for the club.
Given that everything SJH has done has been in the best interests of Wolves, and most of it has been wrong, I find this very worrying. We won't get a venture capitalist type invester imo as we have little of value for them to sell.
Your opinion, fair enough.
The main point, which is now dragging, is I want the right person so come in, your happy for anyone to come in.
Our opinions differ, lets just leve it at that shall we?
Free of the amateurs who have been running the football club, with potential crowds of 30,000 plus in the PL, I disagree.
It would appear that the original price tag was the stumbling block.
The new owner doesn't have to live in central Wolvo, after all.
I think people can see the potential, but we were massively overpriced. To be honest I don't think crowd numbers will be too important in the prem with the new tv deal
Flitwick Wolf
11-01-2007, 17:22
I think people can see the potential, but we were massively overpriced.
We are being given away!!!!!!
Any new chairman is merely moving his/their wealth from one asset into another.
Hibbitt was King
11-01-2007, 17:27
We are being given away!!!!!!
Any new chairman is merely moving his/their wealth from one asset into another.
Given away, yes, but the £40m guarantee for players was seemingly too high. Seems interested parties are happy to guarantee £20m.
And from the other thread, it still seems uncertain whether the lease on the land, and ownership of the buildings is included in the price.
We are being given away!!!!!!
Any new chairman is merely moving his/their wealth from one asset into another.
I'm not sure I choose to believe that it is that simple.
Flitwick Wolf
11-01-2007, 17:34
I'm not sure I choose to believe that it is that simple.
:)
I'm sure they may be a few more complications.......
vBulletin® v3.7.3, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
